http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9292
Summary: hasNestedArgs wrong result for nested template literal
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: DMD
AssignedTo: nobody@puremagic.com
ReportedBy: johannespfau@gmail.com
--- Comment #0 from Johannes Pfau <johannespfau@gmail.com> 2013-01-10 11:25:00 PST ---
Created an attachment (id=1178)
test case
When compiling testcase.d, hasNestedArgs returns these results:
topNIndex!() nested=0
Test!(indirectLess) nested=1
BinaryHeap!(Test()) nested=0
AFAIK BinaryHeap!(Test()) should also be marked as nested, as it needs
Test!(indirectLess) which is nested?
I'm not sure if this causes a real problem in dmd, but we use
hasNestedArgs/isnested in gdc to tell the backend if the instantiated template
is accessible from other modules.
Therefore this test case currently ICEs gdc (also depends on gcc version. Some
are more picky)
BTW: Would it be OK to mark this as "blocker", as it blocks gdc from compiling
that test case?
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9292
Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw@ubuntu.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |ibuclaw@ubuntu.com
--- Comment #1 from Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw@ubuntu.com> 2013-01-10 12:44:09 PST ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> Created an attachment (id=1178) [details]
> test case
>
> When compiling testcase.d, hasNestedArgs returns these results:
>
> topNIndex!() nested=0
> Test!(indirectLess) nested=1
> BinaryHeap!(Test()) nested=0
>
> AFAIK BinaryHeap!(Test()) should also be marked as nested, as it needs
> Test!(indirectLess) which is nested?
>
> I'm not sure if this causes a real problem in dmd, but we use
> hasNestedArgs/isnested in gdc to tell the backend if the instantiated template
> is accessible from other modules.
>
> Therefore this test case currently ICEs gdc (also depends on gcc version. Some
> are more picky)
>
> BTW: Would it be OK to mark this as "blocker", as it blocks gdc from compiling
> that test case?
IIRC, the way DMD does it, all functions are public, even nested ones. I think
I've had this argument before with Alex over whether I should follow suit or
carry on marking nested functions as non-public. Call by alias is meant to be
a direct call that skips any checks for where the function actually is. So far
have been special casing these instances as I find them.
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9292
--- Comment #2 from Johannes Pfau <johannespfau@gmail.com> 2013-01-12 10:24:22 PST ---
What drawback has marking all functions PUBLIC? I guess it'll completely
prevent the backend from removing unreachable nested functions so it's not a
perfect soultion. Although it sounds like a simple & quick solution to a not so
simple problem.
Doesn't detecting such cases in the backend basically mean duplicating the
hasNestedArgs functionality? And I guess the GCC backend doesn't let us skip
those tests, as it seems to chocke on nested, public functions.
We can continue the gdc specific discussion here:
http://gdcproject.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35 but I think we should still
leave this bug open as it's also a bug in the frontend.
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------